Jonathan Tells Boko Haram “We Are Open To Dialogue”

By
Information Nigeria
-

Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan on Sunday said Islamist group Boko Haram was seeking to destabilise the government and had continually changed its targets in an effort to do so.

“Terrorists all over the world have one common agenda: destabilising government,” he said during a question-and-answer session on national television before describing how the group had moved from targeting local rivals to government institutions and now churches.

Jonathan, who has come under heavy criticism in recent days over spiralling violence in the country’s north, described how the group had moved from targeting local rivals to government institutions and now churches.

He said earlier waves of attacks had not brought down the government, leading the group to target churches in Africa’s most populous nation, roughly divided between a mainly Muslim north and predominately Christian south.

“Attacking churches is to instigate religious crisis,” Jonathan said. “They believe that when they attack a church, Christian youths will revolt against Muslim youths. They don’t care about who dies in the process.

“If it doesn’t work, the same Boko Haram will start attacking mosques to instigate Muslim youths to attack Christians. So they change their tactics.”

Jonathan however pledged that Nigeria would halt the violence. He said the government was open to dialogue if Boko Haram figures identified themselves and made clear demands.

The television appearance, in which the president took questions from a panel of journalists before fielding phone-in questions from ordinary Nigerians, featured some of his clearest statements yet on the Boko Haram insurgency, which has killed hundreds since 2009.

Most of his public comments have been limited to assurances that the violence will soon end, and the country’s main Christian body this week in a rare move directly and harshly criticised him over his response to the insurgency.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

11 COMMENTS

  1. people should stop critisizing islam, people that distablize nigeria has nothing to do with islam they just on their personal interests.
    People are misjudging the peace of islam, now judging islam as the religion of super terrorist all over the world is obviously a real propaganda.
    We should stop calling those that causes bomb blast in nigeria as islamist because even non-muslims are involved in it but we are now putting blame in only one side, lets be fair to each other and give respect to our religeon please.

  3. Mr Lukman nobody is accusing islam as a religion, but one thing is clear amoung all the bh leaders or kingpins there as never been a pastor or rev or prophet.try to get this straight and stop been sentimental all muslim are not terorist but all potential terorist is a muslim. pls trace history.EMBRACE CHRIST TODAY AND U WILL ENJOY PEACE FOR EVER. THANK U .

  9. @Moses, you are clearly a boko haram member or sponsor. What is actually your agitations, what do you people want?. Remember,we cannot always rule Nigeria. We should give other federating states a chance

  10. Can you explain the concept of “Anfal” in Islam? There is a sura in the Quran dedicated to Anfal. Please define this word.
    Anfal means spoils of war غنایم. For thousands of years, primitive tribes, raided and plundered each other. The more savage societies also looted thewives and children of the vanquished. Womenwere often raped and children were enslaved and sold.
    Arabs were a bunch of savages. Raiding and looting was for them a way of life. Four months during the year they abstained from fighting, when war wasregarded a sacrilege. These were called sacred months, الْأَشْهُرُ الْحُرُمُ. You can find a mention of them in the Quran 9:5. Outside thesemonths they were free to raid and loot one another. There was no central power to punish the aggressors.
    When the prophet of Islam migrated to Medina, his followers who migrated with himwere mostly slaves and disaffected youths. Theywere destitute. Muhammad continued the tradition of Arabs and told them to steal for their sustenance. The morality of Arabs was so low that no one objected to a prophet ofGod engaging in thuggery. On the contrary, they attributed his successes to divine assistance.
    Primitive people think might is right. You can often find this kind of primitive thinking in children. I was about 10 when our teacher in one of the small towns in Iran said he would take us for swimming. We were excited and looked forward to it. When the promised day came, we had brought our shorts and towels and were getting ready for to a day of fun. There were a couple of students in our class who were Baha’i or Jew.Our teacher said they cannot come. He said they are najis and hencethey can’t go in the same pool with Muslims. I can’t forget the disappointment andsadness of those kids. That was a clear injustice, but as a ten years old child I was unable to see this as such. I felt sad but I thought it is the kid’s fault for not being Muslim. My sense of morality had not been evolved enough to see things clearly. I blamed the victims. In a society where everyone thinks like you, you get validation from others and your distorted thinking is confirmed. Our thoughts must be challenged in order to evolve. This is how evolution takes place. The weak dies and the fittest, survives. Where organisms are not challenged, they don’t evolve. There are species on earth that have not evolved for hundreds of millions of years. It is because they have never been challenged. There was no need for them to evolve. When an idea is not challenged, it will not evolve. This is the sad saga of Islam.
    When Muhammad raided the caravans and the villages of the Arabs,massacred unarmed populations and plundered their belonging, enslaved their women and children, not only his followers, but also otherArabs did not see this assomething utterly evil. The more he succeeded in his raids or ghazwa as he called them, the more popular he became. His foes joined him because he was becoming powerful. Tabari says Khalid ibn Walid and Amro ibn Aas were enemies of Islam and fought against Muslims. They convertedwhen they saw Muhammad is becoming victorious. Arabs saw that those who converted to Islam had been enriched. All their earning came from robbery. But it was a robbery sanctioned by God. In the Arab’s primitive wayof thinking that was an indication that God was behind Muhammad.
    Muslims’ sense of morality has not evolved since the time of Muhammad. This primitive way of thinking of Arabs that believes might is right has spread to all Muslim countries, including to Iran and to Muslims of the Indian sub-continent who were much more evolved than the Arabs. Now we have become like them – a bunch of savages. Our sense of justice has evaporated and our thinking has become as primitive as those of Arabs who thanks to Islam have never come out of their savagery.
    The great Persian historian Mohammad ibn Jarir Tabari narrates Muhammad’s crimes in detail, describing his treacheries, robberies, rapes, assassinations and murders to the extent that the reader feels nauseated. Yet thishighly learned man is unable to see that the founder of that much evil cannot be a prophetof God.
    One of the greatest geniuses that ever lived was Jalaleddin Rumi. Despite all his talent, he too is incapable of seeing the man he calls his prophet was a thug. He even believed in Muhammad’s nonsense that God transformed the Jews into pigs and monkeys when they broke the law of Sabbath.
    This is what religion does to people. Smart people abdicate their intelligence when they believe. And as Voltaire says, when people believe in absurdities they can commit atrocities.
    Any sane person can understand that raiding someone’s home, killinghim and robbing his belonging is wrong. It does not require a lot ofintelligence to understand this much. Yet amazingly, 1.5 billion Muslims, among them many educated people, are unable to see that.
    Muhammad has even a sura in the Quran describing how the stolen property should be divided. Sura Anfal was written after the battle of Badr. It starts by saying, يَسْأَلُونَكَ عَنْ الْأَنْفَالِ قُلْ الْأَنْفَالُ لِلَّهِ وَالرَّسُولِ “They ask you (O Muhammad) about the spoils of war. Say: The spoils of war belong to Allah and the messenger.” Here Muhammad makes the maker of the universe a partner in his crime when anyone with a brain the size of that of a cat knows that God has no use for the stolen belongings of a bunch of Arabs. All that spoil went to Muhammad. So why defile the name of God? The real translation of this verse is, the stollen property belongs to me and myself. Muhammaddid not believe in God. He used him as a tool to fool people. If he really believed in God he would not have dared to attribute so many liesto him.
    An article titled, “ Jihad: The Forgotten Obligation” that can be found with a Google search on several Islamic sites says: “Provision, Under the Shade of the Spear: Narrated Ibn Umar (ra) that the Prophet (saw) said, “ My livelihood is under the shade of my spear, and he who disobeys my orders will be humiliated .” (Bukhari, p.408, vol.1) The virtue of the spear has been mentioned in this hadith and we havebeen informed that the livelihood and provision of the Prophet (saw) lies in the spear (jihaad).This is why the muhaditheen have stated that the best earning is that of war booty and it is clearly proven by this hadith that booty has been made permissible for this Ummah. Note: the term ”humiliation for the kuffar” in the hadith, means paying jizya (a small tax levied for the non-Muslim citizens – dhimmis – of the Islamic state). (Fath ul Bari, p.116, vol.2)”
    The above sums up the morality of Muslims. The hadiths say Muhammad earned his livelihood through robbery. As the result Muslim scholars and muhaditheens (collectors of hadith) have concluded that booty is permissible andthe best earning is the one that comes from robbery. Today, Muslimslament that the obligation of jihad has been forgotten and thatthey should earn their livelihood by plunderingand forcing the non-Muslims to pay jizyah.
    This is how Mafia operates. In fact the Mafia owes its existenceto Islam. Muslims conquered Sicily and Malta in 902 and ruled the Islands until 1061, when they were evictedfollowing the Norman Conquest, the local gangsters moved in to fill their gap. Extorting money, in exchange for “protection,” is want Muslims practiced in south Italy. It is by understanding this connection that we can understand how the Mafia can reconcile theircrime with their religiosity.
    The irony is that in Islam theft is prohibitedand the punishment of the thief is chopping hishand for the first offence and then amputation of other limbs for subsequent offenses. But that is when the thief steals from a Muslim. When the victim is a non-Muslim there is no punishment. Such theftsare regulated and encouraged.
    In the raid at Wadi al Qura, right after the raid of Kheibar, a stray arrow killed a slave of Muhammad. Muslims gathered around him and congratulated him for attaining the paradise. Muhammad said, “Certainly not! His cloak is even now burning on him in hell. He had stolen the cloak he is wearing from the spoil of the Muslims.” Another Muslim hearingthis came forth and said“Apostle of Allah, I had no shoes and took this pair of sandal thongs from the man I killed.” Muhammad told him “Two thongs of fire will be cut for you like that.”He then explains that whatever is taken as spoil must be put in a pool and divided as Allah has ordained. One fifth belongs to Allah and his messenger ( me and myself) and the restshall be divided among the raiders. The one with a horse gets three shares, the one on foot gets one share. Women who had come to attend the wounded getno share, but they gist gifits like a stollen necklace or a stollen dress.
    Do you see the irony? These two Muslims will go to hell because they stole a cloak and a pair of sandals from the spoils, but the spoil itself is lawful and the best earning. The same sura Anfal says, فَكُلُوا مِمَّا غَنِمْتُمْ حَلَلًا طَيِّبًا “ Enjoy what you took in war, lawful and pure. ”(Q. 8:69) This verse indicates that maybe some of the Muslims had a cognitive dissonance and their conscience was bothering them. Muhammad revealed this verse so they can placate their conscience.How can one argue withwhat God has decided? If God says killing and stealing from non-Muslims is lawful, who can question it?
    This is how Muslims put their conscience aside. Once a matter is decided by God, the believer will not bring his conscience into equation. He will ignore his conscience. God knows best and it is not up to humans to question the wisdom ofGod. Fortunately, most religions don’t have too many evil teachings in regards to non-believers. But Islam has plenty of them and consequently Muslims are reduced into thugs and criminals. They are the most immoral and the most treacherous people in the world. When it comes to doing evil, no one can match a Muslim. No one can do as much evil as a Muslimwithout any pang of conscience. All people do evil, but often they are troubled by it and ask their god for forgiveness. Muslims do evil and stand in prayer thanking their god for enabling them to do it. They expect to be rewarded for it. The Basiji thugs in Iran who raped young girls before killing them were convinced that they will be rewarded by God for their despicable crimes. Islam reduces humans into monsters.
    Islam is the religion of thieves. Not just thieves, but also pedophiles, rapists, assassins, murderers and tyrants can find justification for their evilness in Islam. The only prohibition is that you cannot steal from your gang. Any gangster organization has the same rule. If youare a member of Mafia and steal from your godfather you will be dealt with more severely than by any law. This does not meanthat criminals are against stealing. They do it for living. But if you are a member of a criminal organization you must not steal fromthe gang.
    Even though Muhammad prohibited Muslims stealing from the spoils before he got his lion’s share, he openly stole from his followers. Right after Kheibar was conquered Muhammad set his eyes on Fadak, which was the most fertile land of Arabia. The population of Fadak, assessing theirprospect decided to surrender. They sent a delegation to Muhammad while he was still in Kheibar telling him that they will abandon their townin exchange for their lives. Muhammad agreed. He then offered them to stay as serf andgive 50% of what they produce to him. He declared that Fadak is his personal property because Muslims did notfight there. The reason these Jews surrendered was obviously because of Muhammad’s army. Without that army, would they have surrendered to one man? He took 20% of every plunder, without ever fighting personally or putting his life in danger. But he kept the entire wealth of Fadak and Bani Nadir to himself, because the populations of these towns surrendered without a fight. It is not that his followers were as dumb as not to notice, but they were afraid to question him. He did as he pleased andno one dared to argue with him, because arguing with him was as arguing with God. That is what prevents Muslims from questioning Islam today.
    Every Iranian must learnabout Fadak. This little town has played a crucial role in the destiny of our country. After the death of Muhammad, Fatima, hisonly surviving daughter,claimed that Fadak should be her inheritance because it was the private property of her father. Abu Bakr, who had become the caliph elected by everyone including Ali, Fatima’s husband, said that the Prophet did not have private properties and whatever he owned should go to baitul mal (public treasury). Muhammad also had several wives, including Aisha and Hafsa, daughters of Abu Bakr and Omar, and a grandson by his other daughter Zeinab, who should have been included as inheritors, in case the property were to be given to his kin. Hence, even if Fadakwere Muhammad’s private estate, the claimof Fatima was unfounded. That is where the fight between Ali and other caliphs began – over a stolen property. This is the origin of the Sunni-Shiite divide.

  11. To demonstrate that Islam does not promoteviolence Muslims often quote a part of the quranic verse 5:32. “ Whosoever killed a person it shall be as if he killed all mankind; and whoso saved a life, it shall be as if he has saved the life of all mankind .”
    That sound pretty good. The problem is that it isnot a teaching of Muhammad. It is a quote from Judaic scriptures.
    “Whoever destroys a soul, it is considered as if he destroyed an entire world. And whoever saves a life, it is considered as if he saved an entire world.” Jerusalem Talmud Sanhedrin 4:1 (22a)
    Killing one person is notthe same as the genocide of all mankind. It only makes sense in its context. It is related to the mythology of Abel and Cain. Since these two brothers were the only men at that time, killingone of them would haveprevented his offspring to be born and humanity would not come to exist.
    Actually despite Muslims’ claim Muhammad did not say this is his own teaching. The complete verse is as follow:
    “ On account of this, WE prescribed for the Children of Israel that whosoever killed a person it shall be as if he killed all mankind; – unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land – and whoso saved a life, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind. And our Messengers came to them with clear Signs, Yet even after that, many of them commit excesses in the land. ”
    Muhammad is quoting abiblical fable. How can Muslims claim credit for it?
    The problem does not end there. Talmud is not considered to be theword of God. It is the recorded teachings of Sanhedrin, the high council of rabbis.
    So why Allah says “WE prescribed for the Children of Israel…”?
    The god of the Quran is claiming ownership of something he never said. This leaves us with few options.
    1- Allah has plagiarized the teachings of the rabbis.
    2- He was confused and had forgotten that those words were not his.
    3- This verse is not from God. Muhammad admitted that sometimes Satan came and whispered some verses to him that he thought were from God.Could this verse be one of those satanic verses?
    4- Muhammad lied. The Quran is not the word of God.
    I cannot think of another option to explain why Allah claimsownership of a verse that he never said. The quote is not in the Bible;it is from Talmud and Talmud is not considered to be the word of God.
    Now, this verse emphasizes that killing is bad. But Muhammad told his followers that waging war, fighting and killing are the best commerce, which will have the highest reward.
    “O you who believe! Shall I guide you to a commerce that will saveyou from a painful torment? That you believe in Allah and His Messenger and that you strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with your wealth and your lives… (Q .61:10-11)
    So he had to make a disclaimer. While quoting the Talmud he inserted “unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land” in the verse. This disclaimer does notexist in the original textof the Talmud.
    With this disclaimer his followers were left free to raid and to kill non-Muslims. Those who resisted Islam and opposed it were considered to be spreading mischief.
    The word mischief is the translation of the word “fitnah”, which means dissention, opposition, sedition. If you dissent Islam or oppose it you are causing sedition and spreading mischief. Youare considered to be waging war against it. This war does not have to be violent. Your mere disagreement with Islam is the same as waging war against it. If you criticize Islam or preach a faith other than Islam to Muslims you are causing sedition. All these are mischief.
    What is the punishmentof those who spread mischief?
    “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, orcrucifixion, or the cutting off of hands andfeet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishmentis theirs in the Hereafter.”
    So the only verse that Muslims oft quote to claim Muhammad prohibited killing is from Judaism, is wrongly attributed to Allah and it contains a disclaimer, which allowsMuslims to kill all those who don’t agree with Islam.